I've been training my CNN and got the following as results:
I just know that the training and validation accuracy needs to both be high, but are these numbers good enough? How do I know when to stop? Should I concern myself with the losses, or only accuracy? Which epoch shows the best result so far?
Loss value implies how poorly or well a model behaves after each iteration of optimization. where as accuracy of a model is usually determined after the model parameters and is calculated in the form of a percentage.
Yes, training and validation should be high. Numbers always depend on subject area where we are dealing. In case of medical domain these numbers not good.
If you have serious class imbalance, your model will maximize accuracy by simply always picking the most common class, but this would not be a useful model. In this case cross entropy or log-loss would be a better loss function to optimize.
Generally the lower the loss the better a model unless the model has overfitted to the training data.
10th epoch is best where you got higher validation accuracy and lower validation loss.
Related
There are two models that have same structure and learn same dataset.
And those models record the same least validation loss value.
The difference is like below.
The First model doesn't have regularization and stops learning at epoch 15(this epoch is the point where the least validation loss value happens.
Second model has regularization and stop learning at epoch 25(this epoch is the point where the least validation loss value happens.
As I wrote down in the front, key point is that those model record the same least validation loss value
In this case, which model is better?
If you used your validation data in the process of training (for selecting hyperparameters) then I highly suggest to have a different set of data as test-set and that will give you the answer, otherwise your validation-set is actually your test-set and when you say they have the same test loss then you mean their performance are the same (if you are not sure if your test-set is a good representation of models performance in real life, then make your test-set better, e.g. make it bigger). If you want to use one of them for an important task, I suggest you to have a cross-validation test to see which of them is better.
Note that regularization is used for reducing the overfitting in order to achieve higher validation and test results. So after learning and when you want to use the model it really doesn't matter if the model used regularization or not, but the performance and speed matters.
For summary, I see no better model from what you said.
What i would suggest is go for 2nd model .i.e model with regularization and stops learning at epoch 25.
The reason is since you have used regularization technique chances of overfitting your training data is very less.
I have been working on Multitask model, using VGG16 with no dropout layers. I find out that the validation accuracy is higher than the training accuracy and validation loss is lesser than the training loss.
I cant seem to findout the reason to why is this happening in the model.
Below is the training plot:
Data:
I am using (randomly shuffled images) 70% train, 15% validation, 15% test, and the results on 15% test data is as follows:
Do you think these results are too good to be true?
At the beginning, yes, but at the end you can see they sort of start changing places.
At the end of the training you are getting near an overfit point (if the val loss starts increasing or the val accurace starts decreasing, then you've reached overfitting)
But at the beginning, what can explain that behavior might be some data unbalance between training and test. Maybe you've got easier examples in the validation database, or a class unbalance, or more empty values, etc.
I am training a model, and using the original learning rate of the author (I use their github too), I get a validation loss that keeps oscillating a lot, it will decrease but then suddenly jump to a large value and then decrease again, but never really converges as the lowest it gets is 2 (while training loss converges to 0.0 something - much below 1)
At each epoch I get the training accuracy and at the end, the validation accuracy. Validation accuracy is always greater than the training accuracy.
When I test on real test data, I get good results, but I wonder if my model is overfitting. I expect a good model's val loss to converge in a similar fashion with training loss, but this doesn't happen and the fact that the val loss oscillates to very large values at times worries me.
Adjusting the learning rate and scheduler etc etc, I got the val loss and training loss to a downward fashion with less oscilliation, but this time my test accuracy remains low (as well as training and validation accuracies)
I did try a couple of optimizers (adam, sgd, adagrad) with step scheduler and also the pleateu one of pytorch, I played with step sizes etc. but it didn't really help, neither did clipping gradients.
Is my model overfitting?
If so, how can I reduce the overfitting besides data augmentation?
If not (I read some people on quora said it is nothing to worry about, though I would think it must be overfitting), how can I justify it? Even if I would get similar results for a k-fold experiment, would it be good enough? I don't feel it would justify the oscilliating. How should I proceed?
The training loss at each epoch is usually computed on the entire training set.
The validation loss at each epoch is usually computed on one minibatch of the validation set, so it is normal for it to be more noisey.
Solution: You can report the Exponential Moving Average of the validation loss across different epochs to have less fluctuations.
It is not overfitting since your validation accuracy is not less than the training accuracy. In fact, it sounds like your model is underfitting since your validation accuracy > training accuracy.
My team is training a CNN in Tensorflow for binary classification of damaged/acceptable parts. We created our code by modifying the cifar10 example code. In my prior experience with Neural Networks, I always trained until the loss was very close to 0 (well below 1). However, we are now evaluating our model with a validation set during training (on a separate GPU), and it seems like the precision stopped increasing after about 6.7k steps, while the loss is still dropping steadily after over 40k steps. Is this due to overfitting? Should we expect to see another spike in accuracy once the loss is very close to zero? The current max accuracy is not acceptable. Should we kill it and keep tuning? What do you recommend? Here is our modified code and graphs of the training process.
https://gist.github.com/justineyster/6226535a8ee3f567e759c2ff2ae3776b
Precision and Loss Images
A decrease in binary cross-entropy loss does not imply an increase in accuracy. Consider label 1, predictions 0.2, 0.4 and 0.6 at timesteps 1, 2, 3 and classification threshold 0.5. timesteps 1 and 2 will produce a decrease in loss but no increase in accuracy.
Ensure that your model has enough capacity by overfitting the training data. If the model is overfitting the training data, avoid overfitting by using regularization techniques such as dropout, L1 and L2 regularization and data augmentation.
Last, confirm your validation data and training data come from the same distribution.
Here are my suggestions, one of the possible problems is that your network start to memorize data, yes you should increase regularization,
update:
Here I want to mention one more problem that may cause this:
The balance ratio in the validation set is much far away from what you have in the training set. I would recommend, at first step try to understand what is your test data (real-world data, the one your model will face in inference time) descriptive look like, what is its balance ratio, and other similar characteristics. Then try to build such a train/validation set almost with the same descriptive you achieve for real data.
Well, I faced the similar situation when I used Softmax function in the last layer instead of Sigmoid for binary classification.
My validation loss and training loss were decreasing but accuracy of both remained constant. So this gave me lesson why sigmoid is used for binary classification.
I have run deep learning models(CNN's) using tensorflow. Many times during the epoch, i have observed that both loss and accuracy have increased, or both have decreased. My understanding was that both are always inversely related. What could be scenario where both increase or decrease simultaneously.
The loss decreases as the training process goes on, except for some fluctuation introduced by the mini-batch gradient descent and/or regularization techniques like dropout (that introduces random noise).
If the loss decreases, the training process is going well.
The (validation I suppose) accuracy, instead, it's a measure of how good the predictions of your model are.
If the model is learning, the accuracy increases. If the model is overfitting, instead, the accuracy stops to increase and can even start to decrease.
If the loss decreases and the accuracy decreases, your model is overfitting.
If the loss increases and the accuracy increase too is because your regularization techniques are working well and you're fighting the overfitting problem. This is true only if the loss, then, starts to decrease whilst the accuracy continues to increase.
Otherwise, if the loss keep growing your model is diverging and you should look for the cause (usually you're using a too high learning rate value).
I think the top-rated answer is incorrect.
I will assume you are talking about cross-entropy loss, which can be thought of as a measure of 'surprise'.
Loss and accuracy increasing/decreasing simultaneously on the training data tells you nothing about whether your model is overfitting. This can only be determined by comparing loss/accuracy on the validation vs. training data.
If loss and accuracy are both decreasing, it means your model is becoming more confident on its correct predictions, or less confident on its incorrect predictions, or both, hence decreased loss. However, it is also making more incorrect predictions overall, hence the drop in accuracy. Vice versa if both are increasing. That is all we can say.
I'd like to add a possible option here for all those who struggle with a model training right now.
If your validation data is a bit dirty, you might experience that in the beginning of the training the validation loss is low as well as the accuracy, and the more you train your network, the accuracy increases with the loss side by side. The reason why it happens, because it finds the possible outliers of your dirty data and gets a super high loss there. Therefore, your accuracy will grow as it guesses more data right, but the loss grows with it.
This is just what I think based on the math behind the loss and the accuracy,
Note :-
I expect your data is categorical
Your models output :-
[0.1,0.9,0.9009,0.8] (used to calculate loss)
Maxed output :-
[0,0,1,0] (used to calculate acc )
Expected output :-
[0,1,0,0]
Lets clarify what loss and acc calculates :
Loss :- The overall error of y and ypred
Acc :- Just if y and maxed(ypred) is equal
So in a overall our model almost nailed it , resulting in a low loss
But in maxed output no overall is seen its just that they should completely match ,
If they completely match :-
1
else:
0
Thus resulting in a low accuracy too
Try to check mae of the model
remove regularization
check if your are using correct loss
You should check your class index (both train and valid) in training process. It might be sorted in different ways. I have this problem in colab.